Allowed

Simplex Castings Limited v. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(3)

Bombay HC11 Nov 2014WP/2807/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the rejection of a stay application under Section 220(6) by the Assessing Officer. While noting the petitioner has an administrative remedy, the Court issued directions restraining the Revenue from initiating coercive proceedings if the petitioner files a stay application with the Commissioner within 12 days, citing UTI Mutual Fund recommendatio

What did the court decide?

Directorate Revenue prohibited from coercive proceedings if petitioner files stay application with Commissioner within 12 days.

Simplex Castings Limited Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax… — Income Tax | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

903.wpl.2811.2014.doc

¶2

dik

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 2811 OF 2014 WITH WRIT PETITION (L) NO.2812 OF 2014

¶5

M/s Simplex Casting Ltd.

¶6

...Petitioner

¶7

vs Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(3),Mumbai ...Respondent

¶8

Mr S.C.Tiwari for the Petitioner

¶9

Mr Suresh Kumar for the Respondent.

¶10

CORAM : M.S.SANKLECHA & S.C. GUPTE, JJ.

¶11

NOVEMBER 11, 2014

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

This Petition challenges the order dated 30 September 2014 passed by the Assessing Officer, rejecting the Petitioner's application for stay under Section 220(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”), till the disposal of its appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) from the Assessing Officer's order dated 31 March 2013, for the assessment year 2010-11.

¶14

2 We find that administratively the Commissioner of Income Tax, as a matter of practice does entertain and deal with the application for stay, pending the disposal of appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), under Section 220(6) of the Act on the same being rejected by the Assessing Officer. In the present case the Petitioner has not moved the Commissioner of Income Tax against the order dated 30 September 2014, passed by the Assessing Officer, rejecting the Petitioner's stay application.

¶15

3 In view of the above, we see no reason to entertain this Petition, as the Petitioner has a remedy available of filing of an application for stay with the Commissioner of Income Tax. However, as directed by this Court in UTI Mutual

¶16

Pg 1 of 2

¶17

903.wpl.2811.2014.doc

¶18

Fund Vs I.T.O. 345 ITR 71 , wherein while laying down the guidelines for disposal of the stay applications has directed the authorities, not to adopt any coercive proceedings till the disposal of the stay application filed before the appropriate authority for a reasonable period thereafter.

¶19

4 In the light of above, in case the Petitioner files its stay application within 12 days from today with the Commissioner of Income Tax, the Respondent Revenue will not adopt any coercive proceedings till the disposal of the Petitioner's stay application by the Commissioner of Income Tax and for a period of two weeks thereafter from the date of communication of the order to the Petitioner.

¶20

5 The Petition stands disposed of with the above directions. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶21

( S.C.GUPTE J. )

¶22

Pg 2 of 2

Simplex Castings Limited v. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(3)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Simplex Castings Limited v. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(3)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nadi Finance and Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central CIRCLE-41, Mumbai and 2 Ors.

M/s. Shell India Markets Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax -Ltu and Ors.

Essar Projects (India) Limited Vs Union of India and 3 Ors.